u/Niall_Fraser_Love

I think there is some merit to this idea. The Cybermen and Daleks go so overexposed it became a classic example of the inverse ratio between the amount of screen time and the amount of quality.

Shoving a Dalek episode in every year meant they ran out of stuff for them to do. And both Daleks and Cybermen became unthreatning. Like comper Parting of the Ways to Victory of the Daleks or Asylum of the Daleks. There is no mence no more because their can't be. In Magcians apprentice they are just background props. The Cybermen just became joke villians with the Dr blowing up the 7th Cyber Fleet in 2 seconds. They are hopless in Closing Time. Nightmere in Sliver tries to make them scary again. But they don't feel like Cybermen and the idea that they can upgrade while being damaged is nonsense. Not to mention the endless the Master hires the Cybermen as his his goons.

Honestly Resolution and Haunting were good because they gave them something to do. Even if we look passed the idea that a Dalek can be cut in three and glued back together like a jigsaw.

Not helped by the fact that the writers will keep giving them new powers just for this episode then recton it in the next one. The Weeping Angles are maybe the worst for this.

Restricting it to once per doctor maybe twice if said doctor sticks around for 5 years. Would force them to write a good episode and stop creative fatiague. 4 met the Daleks and Cybermen 3 times in total in 7 years. Dose anyone think his era suffered for it? Even then Destiny is a coast off Genesis and Revenge is like a 60s hold over script.

So if it were up to me the rules for them should be

1. once per doctor / once every three years. Quality > quantiy

2. no more team episodes with them, Daleks and Cybermen should be the full focus on every episode they are in. Use the Sontarons as henchmen enemies for the Master or some other baddie.

3. Make the Dr and script take them seriously. The Daleks were behind the Time War and the Cybermen killed Adric and cause his frist regeneration. The Dr should take them seriously. I am 100% fine with the Dr goofing around when its monster of the week no cares about. Not Daleks and Cybermen.

4. Have tha Daleks and Cybermen talk to each other. I don't understand why in 60s Who the Daleks talk to each other but later on they bearly talk. Everyone loves the Cyberleader and Luitenent scenes. No reason why they can't.

5. give them proper ranks. One thing I liked about Victort was the class system. There is no reason why Daleks should be a monolith. Having a class system gives them a sense of culture.

6. Give the Cybermen names again. They had them in the Tenth Planet no reason why they can't have names again, you do this and have them have ranks, its not a controdiction.

7. Have them kill a load of people. This shouldn't need to be explained by Daleks should go full Eric Saward on the guest cast. Because that is their goal. Same with the Cybermen.

8. Don't make them too invulnerable. It should be possible to kill and Dalek or Cyberman but difficult. I kinda hate it when they are all killed in one fell swoop, when nothing could kill them before (I'm looking at you Nightmere in Silver). Think how in Earthshock its possible to kill a Cyberman but diffcult. Or the Daleks in Remmberance.

Iran and Burma are suprsingly simmilar. Both have had authoriterian anti western goverments since the 70s and 60s. Both are lead by religious fanatics who have killed many of their own civilians and think they are on the side of God. The Burmse Prime Minster Min Aung Hlaing is if anything more of a zelot than any of the akhoonds. The Burmse's Junta's army the Tatmadaw is their equvilent to the Pasdaran or the SS. There is no normal army in Bumra and the Min Aung Hlaing is supported by monks and thinks his war is the Buddhist equvilent of jihad.

Iran is about 60% Persian give or take Burma is 70% Barmar. Since the Qajar era the Balochs, Azeris, Ahwazis and especially the Kurds have fought insurgencies aganist Tehran. Burma's minorities like the ethnic Chinese, Shans, Chins and Karens have all fought insurgencies for autonomy in Burma since 1948. And the ethnic Barmar have while not liking the junta have sided always disliked the Ethnic Armed Organisations (EAOs) and the Communist Party Army. But after the elected civilian goverment was toppled by Hlaing's coup, the anti-junta Barmars fought back. Their leader Lady Aung San Suu Kyi told them team up with the EAOs and destroy the Tatmadaw. Many Barmar have joined the People's Defence Forces, a freedom fighting group. The result of the anti-Junta Barmar and the EAOs have libered 60% of Burma by working together. 60% of Burmses land has been liberated from the Tatmadaw's tyranny for the frist time since JFK was president of America. Now yes this mostly rural areas. But control the countryside and you control the country and you choke the cities. A village or small town can feed itself a city can't. The Junta is on terminally decline.

Meanwhile the Prince shuns and scorns PJAK, the BLA, MEK and Ahwazi and Azeri EAOs. The result is that the akhoonds control 100% of Iran. They have not lost a single square foot. And the Prince's fanboys cheer him on. Because the Prince seems to want to be the Babrak Karmal of Iran more than anything. For 60 years the Junta told the Barmar you need to support us in killing you or the country will break up, so you need to live under a human rights regime that would make Russia look like Norway.

But the Barmar have said 'sod it' freedom comes first. But the prince's supporters would rather Iran be run by the akhoonds for the next 50 million years, than treat the non Aryans like human beings. Because fundentally they value empire over freedom. Its a simple as that. The Kurds are 10% of Iranians. For comprison's sake Burma's 2nd biggest ethnic group the Karen's are 7%. If the Prince's supporters were serious about freedom they would be begging Trump to arm PJAK to the teeth so they could sweep the Pasdaran into the dustbin of history.

The fact is the Kurds (and Balochs and Ahwazis) have more reasons to hate the akhoonds than the middle class northern Tehranis could ever concive. For compasisons sake, Tigrayan rebels brought down the Derg regime in Ethiopia, and they were only 6% of Ethiopians. So yes 10% is more than enough, throw in Arabs and Balochs and you have 14%.

If the Prince dose indeed only want freedom as he so professes, why isn't he demanding PJAK is armed? So it can fight and destroy the pasdaran? Just as how the Burmse rebels are destroying the Tatmadaw. Could it be because he wants Trump to install him as ruler of Iran? Just as Barbrak Karmal was installed in Afghanistan by Brezchnev? So like the 'Little Tiger' he only wants power for himself? Because actions speak louder than words. Why has Burma's elected leader endorsed Barmar rebels to work with the EOAs but Prince Puffy says he agrees with the akhoonds' (and his fathers's) apartheid?

The difference between him and Aung San Suu Kyi is wider than the gap between Mercuary and Pluto. Kyi don't think that Karens, Shans, Chins and Chinese are racially and religiously inferior beings like Hlaing dose.

During the cold war, the corrupt greedy authoriterian goverments of Latin America said the world needed them to prevent communism. But infact these dicators tunred their countries into communist breeding grounds. Because they stole all the money and treated their own people like dirt. So why wouldn't any of the straving peasants support the communists if they communists say they will take the money the dicators and tycoons stole and share it amung the commoners?

Racism and ethnic chavanism is receipie for balkenisation. Notice how Switerland don't have a Francophone PJAK or an Italian speaking Sarmachar? Because they have these things called human rights. So they have no reason to rise up.

Now I know PJAK don't trust Trump (and lets be real they are right to), but they are only force capable of bringing down the akhoonds. Unless Trump plans to invade and send in 300,000 Aamericans. Which I can't see happening.

As a rule of thumb I hate any fan theory were its 'all the characters are dead/its all a dream'. But with FT, I think it might take place in Purgatory.

Like if we look at Ted, he is super out of place in his own show. He is the only character with any depth, everyone one else is deliberatly written as a caracature. Like none of the rest of the cast could ever function in real life while Ted could. But without Ted none of the show works. So he is the Atlas of Craggy Island. Like you could do an episode of the Simpsons or Family Guy without Homer or Peter. But not without Ted.

Another thing, we know very little about him. We know his brother is a doctor, but other than that we know nothing of his parents (outside of one line implying they made him become a priest), are they even still alive? His childhood and youth we know nothing. He can maybe speak Gealic judging by his bage. But its competely unclear how long he has known the other three or how long he has been on Craggy Island. (None of this is a bad thing mind.)

So I think there is merit to the idea that after stealing the money from the charity he's in purgatory paying for his sins. Ted is not a hero, he's more of an anti-hero. With few exceptions, he never acts for the good of anyone or anything but his ego. He is vain and self seeking, I love it. Pretty much every episode he could get out of his hole by being honest or modest. But Ted has to 'win' so even winning is trying to put out a fire by pouring more petrol on it. But Ted is still a loveable egotist, like Daffy Duck or Oliver Hardy. Honestly with his Christmas speech slagging off everyone else and thinking he's better than everyone else. I'd not be the least bit surpised if he's based off Eric Saward (I doubt it), to be honest.

This also explain why everyone else is written, talks and acts like an NPC in an RPG. Because he's not in the real world he is in purgatory. He's tested to see if he can reist his worst impluses and fails inevitabliy.

Anyone else ever thought this?

The regime says Mojtaba is alive. But refuses to prove it by publishing a video or photo. Like how Daesh would publish pictures and videos of Baghdadi, so would Izzat al Douri. Or after the Valkyrie plot, Hitler went onto German radio to prove he was alive and the coup aganist him shattered.

What Mojtaba reminds me of is Assad's brother Maher. Maher was commander of the 4th Divison the Baath Party equvilent to the Pasdaran. In 2012, the Free Syrian Army detonated a bomb hidden a conferance room of the Syrian National Security Building. This killed the Defence Minster, his deputy who was Assad's brother in law, the Director of the National Security Bureau and Assisstant to the vice president (Baathists love their long titles). The Baath Party admited they were killed. But it was report that Maher lost a leg in the blast. The Baathists denied this.

It would be super easy to disprove, show a pic of Maher in cargo short and sandels, and stick it on the news. But they didn't and no photos of Maher have ever been published. If its not true why not send a picture? Because it probably is. And I suspect that Mojtaba is alive, but too injured and disfigured to be shown. If it was mearly superfical wounds why isn't he on TV? That's what every other dicator dose to disprove that he is still alive.

I like the Simpsons the best. And many say American Dad (AD) is better than Family Guy (FG). I disgree quite strongly. Both shows have little to know rules about what can and can't happen (like in the Simpsons Homer would never cheat on Marge say). I'd say the biggest difference is that the jokes in AD seem to be more vice based (sex drugs etc) while FG's tend to be more sterytype based. But both shows have both. Ironically I think FG dose poltical jokes more than AD, which kinda dropped them. But here is why FG is better. (I've never really watched South Park, but from what I've seen and heard it seems rather portentous and maybe even a little poshlost - if anyone is Russian speaking here, please tell me if I'm using that word correctly.)

Asthetics

To me what FG just looks better. Like the colour scheme is lots of cool colours, easy on the eyes. Unlike the Simpsons which has mostly soft warm colours. American Dad just looks garish. So much yellow blue and sharp reds and its harsher on the eyes. The colours don't balance. Like in Phinease and Ferb is very candy coloured but they fit together. In AD it looks odley sickly. Like Steve's bright red jacket really stands out. I get this is 100% subjective and maybe this only bothers me but it just dose.

Peter V Stan

Peter is better than Stan. Yes in real life Peter would be a worse person, but in TVland Peter is a more fun character. He's so joyful and extroverted and impulsive. While Stan is just a pompous blowhard. Peter's joy is infectous while Stan's joy feels smug and smarey. Peter having the inteligence of a 6 year old means you expect him to do moronic self sabotaging stuff, he has an execuse. Stan isn't really written to be a moron, so when he acts like a big palooka, its because the script needs him to be.

Griffins v Smiths

Lets start with the matrirachs. Lois is better than Francine, as in she is a better character to watch, not a more moral person. Lois, being this self absorbed but utterly lame house wife is funny. Francine is just kinda an airhead, I don't feel like there is much to talk about. She is rarely the main character, she's a pawn in someone else's game. Steve is better than Chris, since Chris is just 'what if Ralph Wiggum hit puberty'. Chris has the inteligence of a three year old and is a purely reactive to character. Ie he cannot initiate anything, only react to stimulous. Also Steven sounds like he's the age he is meant to be.

I guess Haley is a better character than Meg, since Meg's role was to be the butt monkey. But then they binned that so she is now kinda just there. Haley dose have a goal of being the hippie. But Meg has a nicer voice. Haley speaks in a sardonic tone that is so grating. I get it fits the character but its just obnoxious. Now yes I know Lois's voice is annoying to, but its a fun kind of annoying. Like Lois's voice is meant to be an exaggeration of the nagging mother, so its funny and fun to impersonate. While Haley's sounds more 'real' and I don't think that works for a cartoon.

I 100% understand anyone who says they can't stand FG because of Lois, but I find her moaning funny.

Brain is better than Klause, Klaus's entier personality 'Ja mein Fuehrer. Deauschland Uber Alles'. Brain's snootiness and hypocrisy can be funny when it blows up in his face. Stewie is better than Roger I'd say. Roger dose what ever the writers want, so I can't really care or be suprised by anything he dose. While Stewie is more conistant in what he dose.

Supporting Cast

I can't stand the bulk of the supporting cast on AD. Quagmire is funny, Joe is funny, Cleveland is boring, Consuala is funny. I can't stand any of Steve's mates, they are all unberable. Snot is a twerp, Toshi is the Cleveland of AD (unrelated by is Toshi short for Toshiko?), and Barry is a pound shop Chris. Carter is a riot. Jeff is annoying.

Town

Springfield feels like a real place, Quohog much less so. But Langley Falls seems to have no sense of geography what so ever. The town just has no real personality. Like Danvile in Phineas and Ferb has a sense of geography.

Music

I'll give you that the songs in AD are usually better than those in FG.

Many say AD fixed FG, I just don't see that. Unlike the Simpsons both shows have next to no rules. So Peter or Stan could become King of Neptune for an episode and FG just dose it better most times. Also why dose Peter get condemed for bullying Meg (in current episodes Joe has basically taken that role), but Roger cutting off Steve's arm gets a free pass? Double standards much.

I guess I would swap Chris for Steve and I guess I'd not mind Roger being in FG, and maybe I could have Haley replace Meg, if she kept Meg's voice.

RTD said he make Gatwa's sonic look like a TV remote control because the previous ones 'looked like guns'. But they don't. They look like lightsabers or Harry Potter's magic wond. A banana looks more like a gun fankly.

Dose RTD know what a gun looks like? Has he never seen a James Bond movie or American cop show, or Looney Tunes. Did he forget about the times his own episodes had guns? Did he retwach the end of time and think to himself 'that black gun Dave is holding looks just like his blue light stick'.

https://www.reddit.com/r/doctorwho/comments/1c0shqt/thoughts_on_the_15th_doctors_sonic_screwdriver/#lightbox Gatwa's sonic

https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpreview.redd.it%2Fserious-question-which-sonic-screwdriver-is-the-best-v0-5gekdyn0gfu81.jpg%3Fwidth%3D1080%26crop%3Dsmart%26auto%3Dwebp%26s%3D20cc1fc6ac1490640fb546c380e75058ca2a2ab6 Other Sonics

Contrast with the 80s Cyberguns, which look like guns https://thedoctorwhosite.co.uk/cybermen/weapons/

What he is doing is the equivilent of boxing banning shoes from the ring for saftey purposes when boxers don't kick in the first place, so it makes no difference. Its just so dumb.

(And before anyone says yes I do know about kickboxing and Thai boxing were they do kick, and those are praticed barefoot. But Mohammed Ali boxers don't kick.)

This being from the same guy who decided Davros in a wheelchair was evil.

What is next? Are we going to change Sharez Jek's name to Shaun Jenkins in case anyone finds it Persophobic? Are we going to get rid of the Doctor hating pears incase it causes kids to not eat them and get fat? Are we going to remove 'police' from the police box in case someone thinks real police are time lords? Is the Master going to have his name changed because some clown will say its related to slavery?

I am so over any and all mystery boxes in DW. We are all sick of 'Oh who could this be?' and its the Daleks/Cybermen/Evil Time Lord again.

But I the other one I hate is the companion mystery box. Amy, Clara, Ruby and Bilinda all have some 'mystery' to them that the Dr needs to slove. And its so over done and uneeded. Rose Martha and Donna don't have that. Also having a companion with some gymicky mystery just weakens the companion because the script is focusing on that not their character.

Amy's is fine, since it don't really come up until she has been around for ages. So she is a character 1st and formost. Clara's impossible girl thing is just nonsenical. Like she 'dies' by jumping into a time vortex and that splits her into 100 different versions. So how is she dead? Did Scaroth die when the same thing happned to him? Also dose this mean she never ages she is stuck the age she is? Or is one of the babies in Space Babies really a baby Clara? How are we suposed to care about her if the Dr seems more intersted in 'solving her'?

Ruby has this bizzar 'untwist' that she is normal even though that makes 0 sense. Leaving a baby in on a doorstep in the snow is just reckless as is pointing at a road sign. Then you have Bilinda were her twist is she had a baby the whole time. In her her defence, it seems like for many scripts her character was added in after words. Like she is meant to be a nurse yet in Intersteller Song Contest people get hurt and she just stands there like she has no medical training. Contrast how Martha would patch people up and stuff. Now to be fair Bilinda isn't the only companion to have a background that gets ignored. Like Yaz being a police officer comes up like tiwce. Mel and Peri and meant to be super smart sicentists even though their skills are screaming and fainting.

And Bilinda's is so confusing, it feels like its been added in later.

Notice how other than Clara all the mysteries for our lady companions invlove babies in some way.

(Less than 10% of DW stories have been written by women fun fact)

Like Rose's dead dad is just a man who got hit by a car. There is no mystery or bigger picture it was just bad luck. Pete's early death is used to tell a story.

If it happned once or twice it might be fun, but its been done to death and I am so sick of it. It gose aganist the ideology of the show. The Dr is always banging on about the importance of ordinary people. But half the time they aren't ordinary, they are some super special magic fairy. Rose Martha and Donna were normal people who rose to the challange. But many of the later companions are tied to some gymmick.

I guess I liked the twist that Amy and Rory are River's parents. That has emotional stakes and dynamic. The others are just silly. Like Ruby finding her mother, ok nice for her. But why dose Louise just accept her when Ruby pops round? Why didn't Louise ever try to make any contact with her? Because if Louise did make contact with Ruby there would be no mystery. And Louise accepts Ruby because happy ending, even there is no reason given as to why she didn't try to reach out to her. Since we aren't told why she didn't I have to assume that Louise didn't want to contact Ruby, or was to embrassed? Also we don't know anything about Louise as a person (outside of some facts eg she is 35 she is a nurse ect). RTD has tried to hard to surpise us that he's failed to tell a coherent story. Because everyone expects Ruby/her mother to be the Rani or Romana or the Doctor's mother, RTD thinks he's being smart by 'untwisting' it. Which makes no sense, because no human being would act like the mysterious hood lady.

See also hyping up that the companion will die when they don't, ban that too.

Go back to having companions who are intersting because they are well written characters. I liked that CC didn't do that with his companions, but he forgot to make them interesting.

This seems like a pretty easy and I'd hope uncontroverial idea. If you study medicine or nursing (or other hospital based degrees) in the UK. If you work full time for the NHS for 10 years you student loan gets cleared (providing you've been making repayments). This way if you stay you get your dept wiped, but not if you work for corporations or abroad.

Sounds like a smart way to keep doctors here rather than, current plan of. Graduate Monday, pack bags tuesday, fly to Canada/New Zealand on Wedensday. Which is of no use to the country. This way we get at least 10 years out of our Doctors rather than 0.

Since building new medical schools, so we can train more doctors, is like asking for a second moon to be built. Its simpley physically impossible and that's why no goverment has ever considered it.